Why the United States has a Two-Party SystemBeginning in its infant stage, the United States has consistently maintained two dominant political parties that initially included the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists who debated the ratification of the Constitution. Although the Federalists and the Ant-Federalists eventually gave way to the Republicans and Democrats, they set a precedent for the continued dominance of the two-party system that remains in effect. There are several reasons supporting why the United States has a two-party system which include the election laws, institutional barriers, and political socialization. The election laws established various criteria that favors the major parties, thus perpetuating the two-party system. Some of the election law hurdles encountered by third parties include ballot access and campaign financing restrictions. According to Article I of the Constitution, the states retain the right establish election procedures, unless otherwise prescribed by Congress; and out of fear of too much competition, many states after 1880 established laws to limit ballot access. Many states employ a petition process that requires a certain percentage of signatures to place a candidate on the ballot, and the required signature percentage is generally offset by the parties success in the previous election; therefore placing a tremendous burden on new parties, and restricting the size of the ballot. Restrictions on campaign financing is an obstacle that limits third party participation, supports the two-party system. Although the majority of campaign funds come from the private sector, additional funds are provided through the primary matching funds program and public funding program; which are essentially automatically provided to the major parties, and only to the new parties receiving 5% of the popular vote (reimbursed after the election). By receiving public funds, the candidate must regulate their spending by adhering to a...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...disadvantages of FPTP systemty electoral systems, is defended primarily on the grounds of simplicity and its tendency to produce winners who are representatives beholden to defined geographic areas and governability. The most often cited advantages are that:
It provides a clear-cut choice for voters between two main parties. The inbuilt disadvantages faced by third and fragmented minority parties under FPTP in many cases cause thepartysystem to gravitate towards a party of the ‘left’ and a party of the ‘right’, alternating in power. Third parties often wither away and almost never reach a level of popular support above which their national vote yields a comparable percentage of seats in the legislature.
It gives rise to single-party governments. The ‘seat bonuses’ for the largest party common under FPTP (e.g. where one party wins 45 per cent of the national vote but 55 per cent of the seats) mean that coalition governments are the exception rather than the rule. This state of affairs is praised for providing cabinets which are not shackled by the restraints of having to bargain with a minority coalition partner.
It gives rise to a coherent opposition in the legislature. In theory, the flip side of a strong single-party government is that the opposition is also given enough seats to...

...USA and some other countries.
It is worth noting that in a General Election under FPTP, no one votes directly for a Party, a Prime Minister or a Government. You can only cast a vote for an individual candidate to be elected as an MP. Voting directly for the party is a feature of PR systems such as MMP/AMS, List PR and DPR Voting.
Slide 3:
How does First Past The Post work?
Under First Past The Post (FPTP) voting takes place in single-member constituencies. Voters put a cross in a box next to their favoured candidate and the candidate with the most votes in the constituency wins. All other votes count for nothing.
In a ‘normal’ British national election or by-election (i.e. excluding the newer formats that have been used in recent regional elections for devolution), those who wish to fight an election register to do so. When the election takes place, for example a by-election for a constituency MP for Westminster, the person who wins the highest number of votes within that constituency, wins that election. FPTP is as clear and as brutal as that. Only in the very rarest of cases has a re-count been ordered due to the closeness of that specific result, but in the vast majority of cases, FPTP allows for a clear winner.
Slide 4:
Example: by-election for the constituency. The three main candidates are from the three most prominent national parties. The result is as follows:
Candidate A (Labour):...

...2-PartySystem Essay
As we know, a two-partysystem is one in which two political parties have a clear electoral advantage. Other political parties may exist, but in two-partysystems the vast majority of elected office positions are held by members of only those twoparties. Multi-partysystems also exist throughout the world; in those systems, coalition governments are quite common, while in two-partysystems they are very rare. Single-partysystems also exist, but these systems tend not to be democratic in a substantive sense, as elections exist only to re-elect the ruling party. China is perhaps the most prominent example of a single-partysystem. The United States is a highly visible example of a politically stable country with a two-partysystem. Proponents of the system argue that it is more stable and more nourishing of democracy than the alternatives. Opponents argue that the entrenched interests of the Democratic and Republican parties do not allow for new ideas to gain traction. While it may be true that the...

...Ian Marsh argues that the 2010 election shows that the Australian two-partysystem is “past its used- by date”. Do you agree? Why/why not?
Today for most Australian’s the potential of what a vote can represent is lost in political apathy and some could argue that this directly relates to how the leaders of the two main political parties continually compete for the populist vote. This environment is dominated by the media portrayal of our political parties and as a result of this, policies for the long term interests of the country have become secondary to short term wins (Marsh, 2010).
In his article Marsh (2010) suggests that the Australian political system could benefit from new infrastructure by replacing senate with committees of the legislature rather than the executive which could result in increased flexibility within party structure (Marsh, 2010). This in turn could also improve representational democracy. However, the introduction of a legislature committee is also a potential risk of being another political implement to waste time and resources as the members of these committees would ultimately be tied to party lines, resulting in division within the committee structure.
The Australian political structure does have the potential for change. As loyalist numbers for the two main parties are shrinking...

...EUROPE-ASIA STUDIES Vol. 57, No. 8, December 2005, 1143 – 1167
Legislative Accountability in a Semi-Presidential System: Analysis of the Single-Member District Elections to the Russian State Duma
DINISSA DUVANOVA & JAKUB ZIELINSKI
THE CENTRAL PROPOSITION OF MODERN DEMOCRATIC THEORY is that repeated elections function as a mechanism of accountability. The underlying logic behind this claim is simple: if politicians want to be re-elected and if voters condition their ballots on policy outcomes, then politicians have an incentive to implement policies that beneﬁt the electorate. Otherwise, they lose in electoral competition. This argument is intuitive and well-known, but is it empirically valid? Does the system of repeated elections function as a mechanism of political control? This question is particularly interesting in the case of the new post-communist democracies because electoral competition in these countries takes place in the context of unstable partysystems and, in some cases, under constitutional arrangements obscuring political responsibility. Among new democracies, Russia stands out as one of the most dubious cases for democratic responsibility. It is often argued that, although formal democratic institutions exist in this post-communist country, their de facto functions are diﬀerent from those performed in established liberal democracies. In Russia, where formal democratic institutions do not have...

...Does a two-partysystem help or harm democracy?
A two-partysystem is a form of partysystem where two major political parties dominate voting in nearly all elections. As a result, all, or nearly all, elected offices end up being held by candidates chosen by one of the two major parties. Under atwo-partysystem, one of the twoparties typically holds a majority in the legislature and is usually referred to as the majority party while the other is the minority party. The United States of America is considered a two-partysystem. The chances for third party candidates winning election to any office are remote, although it's possible for groups within the larger parties, or in opposition to one or both of them, to have an influence on the two major parties. Having a smaller party candidate can influence the opinions on voters as well as electors because it allows for a change of mind with the various opinions and propositions candidates may bring about in their running for office. According to Martin P. Wattenburg, The Boston Globe, September 21, 2003, “ With a number of viable...

...not the party but is instead the system of voting that creates the parties. The author begins by first stating the main problem with the twopartysystem mainly the lack of choice it provides for the public. The author then compares our system with its plurality rules with the European parliamentary system of proportional representation. The author also explains that in some areas one party dominates elections in that area so the public has no way of really affecting government policy because they are only presented with one choice. The author points to the old solid south, which was solidly controlled by democrats, as an example. The author believes our twopartysystem forces voters to be pick the lesser of two evils. He supports this claim by pointing to the fact that the twoparties can only ever present two sides of an issue and this leaves the rest of the possible choices out of the picture.
The author also addresses the fact that the government doesn't represent the ideas of all the people who voted. This occurs because the plurality rules in our system only allow the candidate with the most votes to win and this creates a situation similar to the 1987 British elections where a party may get 23% of the vote...

Study Tools

Company

Follow

{"hostname":"studymode.com","essaysImgCdnUrl":"\/\/images-study.netdna-ssl.com\/pi\/","useDefaultThumbs":true,"defaultThumbImgs":["\/\/stm-study.netdna-ssl.com\/stm\/images\/placeholders\/default_paper_1.png","\/\/stm-study.netdna-ssl.com\/stm\/images\/placeholders\/default_paper_2.png","\/\/stm-study.netdna-ssl.com\/stm\/images\/placeholders\/default_paper_3.png","\/\/stm-study.netdna-ssl.com\/stm\/images\/placeholders\/default_paper_4.png","\/\/stm-study.netdna-ssl.com\/stm\/images\/placeholders\/default_paper_5.png"],"thumb_default_size":"160x220","thumb_ac_size":"80x110","isPayOrJoin":false,"essayUpload":false,"site_id":1,"autoComplete":false,"isPremiumCountry":false,"userCountryCode":"RU","logPixelPath":"\/\/www.smhpix.com\/pixel.gif","tracking_url":"\/\/www.smhpix.com\/pixel.gif","cookies":{"unlimitedBanner":"off"},"essay":{"essayId":36079702,"categoryName":"Organizations","categoryParentId":"3","currentPage":1,"format":"text","pageMeta":{"text":{"startPage":1,"endPage":3,"pageRange":"1-3","totalPages":3}},"access":"premium","title":"Two Party System","additionalIds":[17,12,9,103],"additional":["Literature","Government","Entertainment","Entertainment\/Film"],"loadedPages":{"html":[],"text":[1,2,3]}},"user":null,"canonicalUrl":"http:\/\/www.studymode.com\/essays\/Two-Party-System-1101998.html","pagesPerLoad":50,"userType":"member_guest","ct":10,"ndocs":"1,500,000","pdocs":"6,000","cc":"10_PERCENT_1MO_AND_6MO","signUpUrl":"https:\/\/www.studymode.com\/signup\/","joinUrl":"https:\/\/www.studymode.com\/join","payPlanUrl":"\/checkout\/pay","upgradeUrl":"\/checkout\/upgrade","freeTrialUrl":"https:\/\/www.studymode.com\/signup\/?redirectUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.studymode.com%2Fcheckout%2Fpay%2Ffree-trial\u0026bypassPaymentPage=1","showModal":"get-access","showModalUrl":"https:\/\/www.studymode.com\/signup\/?redirectUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.studymode.com%2Fjoin","joinFreeUrl":"\/essays\/?newuser=1","siteId":1}